London cabbies to protest over smartphone app.
Discussion
I can give more examples of easily justifiable laws if you're keen on making a list. I'm struggling to find a particularly strong justification for outlawing a quite sophisticated app that provdes a service the marketplace seems to find beneficial on the basis that it might be contrary to a technicality in the code licensing Black Cabs. 30 years ago it was illegal for Sainsburys to sell me milk on a Sunday. It was the law. Most would consider such a law absurd in 2014. Many did 30 years ago.
What does it actually matter if Uber is found to be a meter? Speaking as a consumer I could not give a hoot. I doubt many consumers would be hooting.
I can see reasons the authorities might want to make a distinction between black cab and private hire, should they wish. I can think of some ways that might be desirable and can even think of ways the distinctions could be made. I can't particularly see a good reason why metering should be one of those distinctions.
What does it actually matter if Uber is found to be a meter? Speaking as a consumer I could not give a hoot. I doubt many consumers would be hooting.
I can see reasons the authorities might want to make a distinction between black cab and private hire, should they wish. I can think of some ways that might be desirable and can even think of ways the distinctions could be made. I can't particularly see a good reason why metering should be one of those distinctions.
DonkeyApple said:
Well as the consumer I'd rather have the distinction and the competition in the market place. We already know where we stand. People know what a taxi is and what a minicab is. I see absolutely no advantage to the public. I can obviously see the huge advantage to minicabs going back to their irritating curb crawling and with no ceiling on prices and zero code of conduct.
Those of is old enough remember London back in the days of curb crawlers and made up numbers and no one wants that back. We also know that the black can fares cap what PH can get away with so want to keep the black cab system if only for that.
Whats "kerb crawling" got to do with this beyond being an emotively loaded fallicy? This is about "metering" not any of the black cabs various other privileges.Those of is old enough remember London back in the days of curb crawlers and made up numbers and no one wants that back. We also know that the black can fares cap what PH can get away with so want to keep the black cab system if only for that.
As for your comments about "no ceiling on prices" and "made up fares", whether legal or not, the uber model looks to me like an attempt to calculate fairs in an open manner that can be demonstrated to the consumer thus is the exact opposite of and addressing your "concerns" about the arbitrary nature of minicab fare calculation, is it not?
scenario8 said:
What does it actually matter if Uber is found to be a meter? Speaking as a consumer I could not give a hoot. I doubt many consumers would be hooting.
I don't give a hoot if my cleaner pays income tax, charges me VAT or remits VAT to HMRC. In fact I just want her to turn up, clean and charge the minimum price. And this is obviously OK as I found my cleaner and booked her using the technology of the internet. Me actually making sure she abides by various potentially inconvenient for her and me laws would be standing in the way of technology and getting the customer what they want, lower prices, wouldn't it?
The fundamental difference between a black and mini cab is pre booking and taximeters. What is it in the Uber business model that (a) makes it ok to ignore local laws (b) makes it not possible to offer the same service, compliant with local laws, by charging fixed fares?
Selling milk on a Sunday is a public benefit. You do not have an alternative place to buy milk. The same customers will be taking the same mini cabs at he same times, even if they book on an Uber which complies with existing laws and charges fixed fares.
Edited by creampuff on Tuesday 17th June 23:15
creampuff said:
The fundamental difference between a black and mini cab is pre booking and taximeters. What is it in the Uber business model that (a) makes it ok to ignore local laws (b) makes it not possible to offer the same service, compliant with local laws, by charging fixed fares?
A. What laws? I haven't looked it up but am pretty sure that Uber's argument is that GPS, by the definition laid down by the law, is not a taximeter. Clearly there is some ambiguity as otherwise they would have been prevented from operating before they even got started. If the law doesn't make provision for GPS as a taximeter then it's the law that needs changing, not Uber's business model.B. There is no actual need to charge a fixed fare. As I mentioned in an earlier post, if my customers have not asked for a quote (most don't bother) I use the odometer to calculate the fare which is EXACTLY the same as using a taximeter. Also, the number of customers that book a car from A to B, only to to then get in and say they actually need to go via C, D and E and also stop at a cashpoint along the way mean as drivers we all need some way to calculate the "new" fare. Using GPS is no different to using the odometer, neither of which are defined, in law, as taximeters.
People complaining about this need to get the laws surrounding what constitutes a taximeter changed, rather than complaining about the companies complying perfectly with the law as it currently stands.
creampuff said:
scenario8 said:
What does it actually matter if Uber is found to be a meter? Speaking as a consumer I could not give a hoot. I doubt many consumers would be hooting.
I don't give a hoot if my cleaner pays income tax, charges me VAT or remits VAT to HMRC. In fact I just want her to turn up, clean and charge the minimum price. And this is obviously OK as I found my cleaner and booked her using the technology of the internet. Me actually making sure she abides by various potentially inconvenient for her and me laws would be standing in the way of technology and getting the customer what they want, lower prices, wouldn't it?
The fundamental difference between a black and mini cab is pre booking and taximeters. What is it in the Uber business model that (a) makes it ok to ignore local laws (b) makes it not possible to offer the same service, compliant with local laws, by charging fixed fares?
Selling milk on a Sunday is a public benefit. You do not have an alternative place to buy milk. The same customers will be taking the same mini cabs at he same times, even if they book on an Uber which complies with existing laws and charges fixed fares.
Edited by creampuff on Tuesday 17th June 23:15
Further, introducing correct payment of taxes into a thread about the protectionist regulations in a taxi thread is about the funniest thing I've ever read on the internet.
wrt the sale of milk; you might consider milk sales to be a public benefit but that was not the reason behind the law prohibiting Tesco from selling it to me in the past. If that's what you want to run with however, consider they couldn't sell me water, a can of beans or a replacement mop head. Nothing in fact. There were, however, many other places I could have bought all of those things on a Sunday. The law as it stood was absurd and most would consider its reintroduction to be unjustifiable. And that's my point, I need the law to be justifiable in order for me to support it.
Again, in the past, the only retailer legally permitted to sell me a stamp was a Post Office. The law dictated it. Absurd. The law existed solely to protect one section of workers and one element of the telecommunications industry with no clear benefit to consumers or to the wider citizenry. I can continue to recite unjustifiable laws restricting trade that have been historically addressed if you like.
So what if a table of judges debate the concept of a meter for a few months and then decide a GPS software programme such as Uber is a meter as defined by the current law. As repeated previously, what does it actually matter (other than to prove a point of law to the benefit of one side of a regulated industry)?
Conceptually I can get my head around the need for regulation of the taxi industry. I can even see justifiable arguments for there to be two distiinct categories. I probably have issues with many of the potential arguments but I can understand them. What I don't understand is why, conceptually, only black cabs would be the only service providers legally permitted to use "meters" when determning fares.
hairyben said:
DonkeyApple said:
Well as the consumer I'd rather have the distinction and the competition in the market place. We already know where we stand. People know what a taxi is and what a minicab is. I see absolutely no advantage to the public. I can obviously see the huge advantage to minicabs going back to their irritating curb crawling and with no ceiling on prices and zero code of conduct.
Those of is old enough remember London back in the days of curb crawlers and made up numbers and no one wants that back. We also know that the black can fares cap what PH can get away with so want to keep the black cab system if only for that.
Whats "kerb crawling" got to do with this beyond being an emotively loaded fallicy? This is about "metering" not any of the black cabs various other privileges.Those of is old enough remember London back in the days of curb crawlers and made up numbers and no one wants that back. We also know that the black can fares cap what PH can get away with so want to keep the black cab system if only for that.
As for your comments about "no ceiling on prices" and "made up fares", whether legal or not, the uber model looks to me like an attempt to calculate fairs in an open manner that can be demonstrated to the consumer thus is the exact opposite of and addressing your "concerns" about the arbitrary nature of minicab fare calculation, is it not?
scenario8 said:
Conceptually I can get my head around the need for regulation of the taxi industry. I can even see justifiable arguments for there to be two distiinct categories. I probably have issues with many of the potential arguments but I can understand them. What I don't understand is why, conceptually, only black cabs would be the only service providers legally permitted to use "meters" when determning fares.
Well why should minicabs not be able to pick up passengers flagging them down off the street? It is just the distinction between black cabs and minicabs along with use of taximeters. Minicab fares are set in advance, presumably based on the cab operators knowledge of typical journey times. If they get their faster, they get the same amount of money. Good for them. If there is a big jam and they take twice as long, they get the same amount of money. Tough cheese.
Uber changes this, by setting the fare by time and distance. One of the two fundamental distinctions between black cabs and minicabs is removed.
creampuff said:
Uber changes this, by setting the fare by time and distance.
Uber ensures that a reasonable fare is charged based on the journey. I don't see the problem with this.creampuff said:
One of the two fundamental distinctions between black cabs and minicabs is removed.
If the change is an improvement, where's the problem except to the protectionism of the black cab drivers?Are you a taxi driver, perchance?
Rovinghawk said:
creampuff said:
Uber changes this, by setting the fare by time and distance.
Uber ensures that a reasonable fare is charged based on the journey. I don't see the problem with this.creampuff said:
One of the two fundamental distinctions between black cabs and minicabs is removed.
If the change is an improvement, where's the problem except to the protectionism of the black cab drivers?Are you a taxi driver, perchance?
Ditching black cabs will remove competition and if all cabs are then working on the same system, ie Uber then all you have is a new cartel but with absolutely no price regulation.
I would prefer meter tariffs that are governed by TFL than by an offshore corporate entity.
Cartels are not per se bad for people, it is how they are run which is pertinent. The black cab system delivers a regulated service via a cartel that defines what we pay for cabs in London. Ie minicabs determine their pricing by being competitive to this figure set by TFL. Remove the price governance from TFL and pass it to Uber for metered tariffs and we all know that costs to consumer will increase.
But you'll still have competition between uber, Addison Lee and the many other services to keep prices in check.
If uber get silly with pricing then someone else will take up the slack. Very few industries need prices fixed by the authorities. Especially not one with such low barriers to entry (that is ones which are at least not artificially placed there)
I think TfL and Boris are secretly delighted by this situation.
Personally I see black cab drivers as utter dinosaurs and am delighted that with these and Addison Lee I can experience a cab service that is widespread, reasonably priced, actually available and willing to travel on my terms and usually without an opioniated biggot at the wheel. I.e the service that we should have always had and which is enjoyed in most cities in the world (even in the UK).
If uber get silly with pricing then someone else will take up the slack. Very few industries need prices fixed by the authorities. Especially not one with such low barriers to entry (that is ones which are at least not artificially placed there)
I think TfL and Boris are secretly delighted by this situation.
Personally I see black cab drivers as utter dinosaurs and am delighted that with these and Addison Lee I can experience a cab service that is widespread, reasonably priced, actually available and willing to travel on my terms and usually without an opioniated biggot at the wheel. I.e the service that we should have always had and which is enjoyed in most cities in the world (even in the UK).
rpguk said:
Very few industries need prices fixed by the authorities. Especially not one with such low barriers to entry (that is ones which are at least not artificially placed there)
I think TfL and Boris are secretly delighted by this situation.
Personally I see black cab drivers as utter dinosaurs and am delighted that with these and Addison Lee I can experience a cab service that is widespread, reasonably priced, actually available and willing to travel on my terms and usually without an opioniated biggot at the wheel. I.e the service that we should have always had and which is enjoyed in most cities in the world (even in the UK).
Black cabs have a high barrier to entry. I think TfL and Boris are secretly delighted by this situation.
Personally I see black cab drivers as utter dinosaurs and am delighted that with these and Addison Lee I can experience a cab service that is widespread, reasonably priced, actually available and willing to travel on my terms and usually without an opioniated biggot at the wheel. I.e the service that we should have always had and which is enjoyed in most cities in the world (even in the UK).
As for the drivers, they vary. I would say that if you are a motorcycle rider then black cabs usually drive properly and are predictable and safe and minicabs can often be driven by retarded idiots who don't look and have no clue.
Rovinghawk said:
creampuff said:
Why not use Uber as a smartphone minicab booking app and leave the minicabs to charge fixed fares as they are supposed to charge?
Because we have technology to calculate fairer prices and have no good reason to not use it.So we have that technology already. Infact we have had that taximeter technology for decades, well before GPS was put into service.
But it is not used in minicabs. I wonder why? Oh that's right, because it is illegal and contrary to the way private hire vehicles are allowed to calculate fares.
It's an outdated law which benefits only the cartel.
It's illegal to use a taximeter but not illegal to use GPS. There is a presumption in law that things are legal unless specified otherwise.
Conclusion: It's legal & it's of benefit to the minicabbers, consumers & HMRC. If black cabs want to compete then they'll have to improve their game.
creampuff said:
Black cabs have a high barrier to entry.
Hence me saying that is ones which are at least not artificially placed there. The barriers to entry - the knowledge, black cab specs etc are a folly. Antiquated stuff that will need to go at some point. It's cute to tell tourists about how our cab drivers have to spend years in education but if the result is not actually being able to find or afford a cab then it's no good.I feel sorry for drivers who have recently done the knowledge but surely it's been clear for years now that sat nav was getting better. Hail-o, uber and others offer the ability to specifically book a black cab so if their knowledge and vehicles are better then they should be able to continue charging a premium price. If not it's proof that we're holding everyone back to protect them. This kind of protectionism almost never works out in the long term.
creampuff said:
As for the drivers, they vary. I would say that if you are a motorcycle rider then black cabs usually drive properly and are predictable and safe and minicabs can often be driven by retarded idiots who don't look and have no clue.
It's always going to be an anecdotal thing. I don't find either group as great drivers. Do black cabs have a higher driving licence requirement then minicabs? (as in testing their driving ability rather then knowledge)creampuff said:
But it is not used in minicabs. I wonder why? Oh that's right, because it is illegal and contrary to the way private hire vehicles are allowed to calculate fares.
You keep making this point about how private hire cars calculate fares but have yet to address my point about using the odometer....Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff